Mailman 3 June 2003 - Python-Dev

Where to put the interrupt module?
by Guido van Rossum June 16, 2003

June 16, 2003

IDLEfork, now in Lib/idlelib, uses a new C extension, the 'interrupt' module. This is a truly minimal, and generally useful, module to provide a way to cause a KeyboardInterrupt in the main thread from a secondary thread. I propose to move this to Modules, and make it a toplevel module. This is the easiest thing in order to get it compiled and built for various platforms. Any problems? --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

10 34

Changes to IDLE
by martin＠v.loewis.de June 15, 2003

June 15, 2003

What is the current procedure for changing IDLE, for Python committers? Can I just commit changes to Lib/idlelib, do I need to post them to idle-fork, or do I need to do something else? [assuming, of course, that I think the change is sensible, and I would consider applying it to be within my competence] Regards, Martin

3 2

Weekly Python Bug/Patch Summary
by Skip Montanaro June 15, 2003

June 15, 2003

Bug/Patch Summary ----------------- 365 open / 3718 total bugs (-14) 159 open / 2211 total patches (+10) New Bugs -------- Enhancements to pdb.py when invoked as script (2003-06-08) http://python.org/sf/751124 Thread in threading.py can only be started once (2003-06-09) http://python.org/sf/751260 cPickle doesn't raise error, pickle does (recursiondepth) (2003-06-09) http://python.org/sf/751276 cPickle doesn't raise error, pickle does (UnpicklingError) (2003-06-09) http://python.org/sf/751279 smtplib crashes Windows Kernal. (2003-06-09) http://python.org/sf/751612 ftplib.retrbinary fails when called from retrlines callback (2003-06-09) http://python.org/sf/751758 2.2.3 Latex documentation missing from web page? (2003-06-10) http://python.org/sf/751933 graminit.[ch] don't build on windows (2003-06-10) http://python.org/sf/751956 Object destruction is broken for slots (2003-06-10) http://python.org/sf/751998 print in __getattr__ causes seg fault (2003-06-10) http://python.org/sf/752221 classmethod abuse --> SystemError (2003-06-12) http://python.org/sf/753451 Installing idle from new location (2003-06-12) http://python.org/sf/753518 websucker bug (2003-06-12) http://python.org/sf/753592 Infinite Loop in RE (2003-06-12) http://python.org/sf/753711 urlparse goes wrong with IP:port without scheme (2003-06-13) http://python.org/sf/754016 Exceptions when a thread exits (2003-06-14) http://python.org/sf/754449 sigwinch crashes python with curses (2003-06-14) http://python.org/sf/754455 New Patches ----------- Let pprint.py use issubclass instead of is for type checking (2003-06-07) http://python.org/sf/750542 imghdr -- identify JPEGs in EXIF format (2003-06-08) http://python.org/sf/751031 Bug fix 750092: exec doesn't need newline (2003-06-08) http://python.org/sf/751038 Tutorial: remove string exceptions, add parnassus, #posts (2003-06-08) http://python.org/sf/751062 fix memory leaks in posixmodule on Windows (2003-06-08) http://python.org/sf/751114 Handle keyboard interrupts in SSL module (2003-06-10) http://python.org/sf/751916 cgitb: make more usable for 'binary-only' software (2003-06-10) http://python.org/sf/751943 ast-branch: multiple function fixes (2003-06-11) http://python.org/sf/752911 sys.interrupt_main() (2003-06-12) http://python.org/sf/753733 Enhanced webbrowser.py (2003-06-13) http://python.org/sf/754022 Enhance xrange description by mentioning itertools.repeat (2003-06-14) http://python.org/sf/754632 Closed Bugs ----------- thread_pthread.h on FreeBSD (2002-05-08) http://python.org/sf/553736 re searches don't work with 4-byte unico (2002-08-23) http://python.org/sf/599377 SO name is too short! Python 2.2.1 (2002-09-16) http://python.org/sf/610332 gethostbyname() blocks when threaded (2002-09-25) http://python.org/sf/614791 parameters for int(), str(), etc. (2002-12-30) http://python.org/sf/660022 ./configure fails w/error: cannot compute sizeof (wchar_t), (2003-02-01) http://python.org/sf/678723 2 (more) bugs in turtle (2003-02-12) http://python.org/sf/685773 Move gmtime function from calendar to time module (2003-03-05) http://python.org/sf/697985 HTMLParser crash on glued tag attributes (2003-03-06) http://python.org/sf/699079 deepcopy can't copy self-referential new-style classes (2003-03-13) http://python.org/sf/702858 Problems printing and sleep (2003-03-15) http://python.org/sf/704194 pydoc support for keywords (2003-04-05) http://python.org/sf/715782 __slots__ broken in 2.3a with ("__dict__", ) (2003-04-18) http://python.org/sf/723540 overintelligent slice() behavior on integers (2003-04-18) http://python.org/sf/723806 Cannot retrieve name of super object (2003-04-28) http://python.org/sf/729103 test_tarfile writes in Lib/test directory (2003-05-02) http://python.org/sf/731403 Need an easy way to check the version (2003-05-06) http://python.org/sf/733231 pyxml setup error on Mac OS X (2003-05-08) http://python.org/sf/734844 os.symlink docstring is ambiguous. (2003-05-13) http://python.org/sf/737291 re.finditer() listed as new in 2.2.? (2003-05-19) http://python.org/sf/740026 test/build-failures on FreeBSD stable/current (2003-05-19) http://python.org/sf/740234 Can't browse methods and Classes (2003-05-20) http://python.org/sf/740407 sum() should be renamed (2003-05-26) http://python.org/sf/744051 anydbm and whichdb again (2003-05-27) http://python.org/sf/744687 xml.sax Contenthandler passes truncated data (2003-05-28) http://python.org/sf/745145 PACKAGE_* in pyconfig.h (2003-05-30) http://python.org/sf/746012 TypeError raised when deepcopying built-in functions (2003-05-30) http://python.org/sf/746304 2.2.3c1 install-sh out of date (2003-05-30) http://python.org/sf/746366 bdist --formats=zip,wininst and bdist --formats=wininst,zip (2003-06-04) http://python.org/sf/749210 os.path.split does not handle . & .. properly (2003-06-04) http://python.org/sf/749261 strange __subclasses__ behaviour (2003-06-05) http://python.org/sf/749480 copy raises SystemError when getstate raises exception (2003-06-05) http://python.org/sf/749831 --enable-shared fails on Solaris 9 with gcc-3.2.3 (2003-06-05) http://python.org/sf/749911 Closed Patches -------------- Warn about inter-module assignments shadowing builtins (2003-03-28) http://python.org/sf/711448 time.tzset documentation (2003-05-08) http://python.org/sf/735051 Remove eval() from csv (2003-05-27) http://python.org/sf/744104

1 0

Like movies?
by Barbara June 15, 2003

June 15, 2003

1 0

PEP280 and my experiment
by Samuele Pedroni June 14, 2003

June 14, 2003

some consideration on PEP 280: Optimizing access to globals http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0280.html after my experiment. 1) in the PEP " Description (Note: Jason Orendorff writes: """I implemented this once, long ago, for Python 1.5-ish, I believe. I got it to the point where it was only 15% slower than ordinary Python, then abandoned it. ;) In my implementation, "cells" were real first-class objects, and "celldict" was a copy-and-hack version of dictionary. I forget how the rest worked.""" Reference: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2002-February/019876.html) " at least now you know there is hope :) for at a minimum some 15% _speedup_ when globals/builtins are heavely involved and a wash when they are not used. 2) " When a function object is created from a code object and a celldict, the function object creates an array of cell pointers by asking the celldict for cells corresponding to the names in the code object's co_globals. If the celldict doesn't already have a cell for a particular name, it creates and an empty one. This array of cell pointers is stored on the function object as func_cells. When a function object is created from a regular dict instead of a celldict, func_cells is a NULL pointer. " this is probably far from ideal for closures, OTOH with the right infrastructure it should be possible to store created caches e.g. in code objects and so reuse them. regards.

2 2

Protect yourself_ and your loved ones from Drunk Driving kzu
by Willa Wang June 14, 2003

June 14, 2003

Mini-Keychain BREATHALYZER! A Must Have! A Fast, Reusable, Pocket-sized Alcohol Detection Device for Use Anywhere, Anytime Alcohol Consumption or Intoxication is a Concern. Don't Be a Victim of Drunk Driving! Makes a great personal item & gift. Almost everyone can use one, even if your a casual drinker. It even has a flashlight built in for added safety. These retail for $99 in stores. Our exclusive internet-offer allows us to sell the Mini-Breathalyzer for ONLY 39.95 !!! ***FREE*** Order Now and get a FREE Cable Descrambler ($70 Value) FREE PayPerViews, Porno, Special Events & More...DONT MISS THIS AMAZING LIMITED TIME DEAL!! http://www.1ajdfhcy.com/cart/customer/product.php?productid=16153&partner=a… =========================================================== If you no longer wish to receive our offers and updates click below and we will promptly honor your request. http://www.1ajdfhcy.com/1/ lncenwaxequ

1 0

Python language standard; LSB
by Tobias Burnus June 13, 2003

June 13, 2003

Hello, one thing that prevents the linux standard base to include Python (or Perl for that matter) is that there is no formal language standard with test cases. (For the LSB a subset might be enough.) http://www.linuxbase.org/futures/faq.html#scope Exists there anywhere a rudimentary standard or are there plans to create one? Tobias

4 6

Re: [Python-Dev] Re: PEP 246 and Protocols (Was: Sneaky 'super' instances)
by Clark C. Evans June 13, 2003

June 13, 2003

Oops. Disregard the last post, it got away too soon. | On Fri, Jun 13, 2003 at 12:50:53AM -0400, Raymond Hettinger wrote: | | I don't see any significant downside to 246. The code is simple | | enough. It is useful in at least some cases and provides some | | support for interoperability. | ... | | So, my questions is whether there is any reason not to adopt 246 | | right away? AFAICT, there is no competing proposal and nothing | | that would be harmed by adoption. What's all the fuss about? | | On Fri, Jun 13, 2003 at 08:19:59AM -0400, Phillip J. Eby wrote: | | Guido has said (and I agree) that if Python includes adapt(), then the | | Python standard library should use it. | ... | | PyProtocols was my attempt to show that a PEP 246 mechanism can | | actually be pretty agnostic about what kind of interface objects | | are used, just like the '+' operator is agnostic about what | | object types it's used with. | ... | | Ah well. :) On the bright side, I think PyProtocols can alleviate | | *one* of his concerns, which was that having a Python-included interface | | type would make other interface types (e.g. Zope interfaces) "second-class | | citizens". That is, I've demonstrated that it is possible to have a | | "protocol protocol", thus allowing different protocol or interface | | types to exist, even if they have no implementation in common (e.g. | | Twisted, Zope, and PyProtocols). Could this approach work: - use regular class inheritance for static requirements - use adapt() for dynamic or custom needs (as shown below) - let specific use cases further refine the requirements This whole 'Interface' issue has been in the works for over three years now, and potentially great interoperability between frameworks and components is being lost. For example, why not just have a 'interfaces.py' in the standard library. The interface for iterators could be something like... # inside interfaces.py class Iterable(object): def next(): """ returns the next value in the iteration, or raises StopIteration to finish up """ def __adapt__(cls, obj): try: return obj.__iter__() except AttributeError: pass // perhaps return a wrapper object // for other types, like lists... __adapt__ = classmethod(__adapt__) Then, iter() could be defined something like... def iter(obj): return adapt(Iterable, obj) Best, Clark

1 0

Re: PEP 246 and Protocols (Was: Sneaky 'super' instances)
by Phillip J. Eby June 13, 2003

June 13, 2003

At 03:42 PM 6/12/03 +0100, Moore, Paul wrote: >From: Phillip J. Eby [mailto:pje@telecommunity.com] > > Open protocols solve the chicken and egg problem by allowing one > > to make declarations about third-party objects. > >OK, I've tried to put together a simple example of "what I expect" and >I find I can't. I want to continue to write code which "just assumes" >that it gets the types it needs - I don't want to explicitly state that >I need specific interface types - that feels like type declaration and >Java. Your IFile example reinforces that, both in terms of its naming >convention, and in the assumption that there *is* a single, usable, >"file" protocol. I know it was my example, but I pointed out later in >the same message that I really sometimes wanted seekable readline-only >files, and other times block read/write (potentially unseekable) files. > >Expecting library writers to declare interface "classes" for every >subtle variation of requirements seems impractical. Expecting the >requirements to be *documented* is fine - it's having a concrete class >which encapsulates them that I don't see happening - no-one would ever >look to see if there was already a "standard" interface which said "I >have readline, seek, and tell" - they'd just write a new one. There >goes any hope of reuse. (This may be what you see as a "chicken and egg" >problem - if so, I see it as a "hopelessly unrealistic expectations" >problem instead, because it's never going to happen...) Even if it's as simple as saying this: class ReadlineSeekAndTell(Interface): """You must have readline, seek, and tell if you pass this to me""" advise(protocolIsSubsetof=[IFile]) Or, even more briefly, using Samuele's way: RST = subproto(IFile,['readline','seek','tell']) >On the other hand, expecting callers to write stuff to adapt existing >classes to the requirements of library routines is (IMHO) a non-issue. >I think that's what PEP 246 was getting at in the statement that "The >typical Python programmer is an integrator" which you quote. It's >common to write > > class wrap_source: > def __init__(self, source): > self.source = source > def read(self, n = 1024): > return self.source.get_data(n) > > lib_fn(wrap_source(my_source)) > >So PEP 246 is trying to make writing that sort of boilerplate easier >(in my view). The *caller* should be calling adapt(), not the callee. That depends. It's common in both Zope and Twisted for framework code to do the Zope or Twisted equivalents of 'adapt()'. But yes, it is also common to state that some function in effect requires an already adapted object. ><snip> >Which is appropriate is basically down to which came first, string or >file. But both suffer from the problem of putting all the knowledge >in one location (and using a type switch as well). Right. That's what the point of the open protocols system is. The problem is that in every Python interface system I know of (except PyProtocols), you can't declare that package A, protocol X, implies package B, protocol Y, unless you are the *author* of package B's protocol Y. But if package A's author used an open protocol to define protocol X, then you can use PyProtocols today to say that it implies package B's protocol Y, as long as protocol Y can be adapted to the declaration API. Translation: anybody who defines protocols for their packages today using PyProtocols, will be able to have third parties define adapters to interfaces provided by Zope or Twisted, or that are defined using Zope or Twisted interfaces. >The third option, which is the "external registry" allows a *user* of >the string and file "libraries" (bear with me here...) to say how he >wants to make strings look like files: > ><snip> >So I see PEP 246 as more or less entirely a class based mechanism. It >has very little to do with constraining (or even documenting) the >types of function parameters. PEP 246 specifically said it wasn't tackling that case, however, and I personally don't feel that a singleton of such broad scope is practical; it seems more appropriate to make protocols responsible for their own adapter registries, which is what PyProtocols (and to a lesser extent Twisted) do. >Of course, a library writer can define interface classes, and the >adaptation mechanism will allow concrete classes to be made to >"conform" to those interfaces, but it's not necessary. And given >the general apathy of the Python community towards interfaces (at >least as far as I see) I don't imagine this being a very popular use >pattern. When designing PyProtocols I did some research on the type-sig, and other places... I got the distinct impression that lots of Pythonistas like interfaces, as long as they're abstract base classes. PyProtocols allows that. But, a protocol can also be a pure symbol, e.g.: import protocols myInterface = protocols.Protocol() Voila. There's your interface. Let the user register what they will. Sure, it doesn't *document* anything that isn't stated by its name, but that's your users' problem. ;) At least they can import 'yourpackage.myInterface' and register adapters now. >And describing a PEP 246 style facility in terms of >interfaces could be a big turn-off. (This applies strongly to your >PyProtocols code - I looked for something like the pep246.register >function I suggested above, but I couldn't manage to wade through all >the IThis and IThat stuff to find it, if it was there...) Unfortunately, I biased the reference documentation towards explaining the architecture and what you need to do to integrate with the framework itself, even though 90% of the actual intended audience of PyProtocols will never need to do anything like that. In a sense, you could say that the current reference manual is much more of an embedding and extending manual, instead of being the Python tutorial. >Once again, I apologise if I've missed your point. But I hope I've >explained what I see as the point of PEP 246, and where your proposal >is going off in a different direction. I understand what you're saying, although I'm not sure how you interpreted PEP 246 that way, when it explicitly states that it *doesn't* cover case "e". And I didn't diverge from PEP 246 in that respect. What I effectively said is, "well, let's make it so that case "e" is irrelevant, because there are plenty of __adapt__-capable protocols, and because you can register the relationships between them." Thus, the solution to case "e" is effectively: Don't use built-in types as protocols! >But the fact remains, that neither PEP 246 nor PyProtocols has any >need to be in the core, or even in the standard library (yet). Wide >usage could change that. Usage in something that is destined for the >standard library could, too, but that one could go the other way (the >"something" gets rejected because it depends on PEP246/PyProtocols). Right, that was why I was asking. >PS This is *way* off-topic for python-dev by now. I suggest that we > leave things here. I don't have anything else worth adding... I suppose we could always resurrect the types-sig.... Although, as Tim Peters has frequently suggested, nothing ends discussion more quickly than having an implementation available. :)

4 7

RE: [Python-Dev] Python language standard; LSB
by sismex01＠hebmex.com June 13, 2003

June 13, 2003

> From: Guido van Rossum [mailto:guido@python.org] > Sent: Viernes, 13 de Junio de 2003 01:36 p.m. > > > [...snippage...] > > > > While Python is more stable than perl in this respect (at > > least I have that expression) the problem is that there is > > no fixed python language: With any new release not only bugs > > are fixed, but also new language features are added. While > > this makes features-to-market faster, it probably creates > > the problems that make it hard to "standardize" python. > > This done when it is included in the LSB (kind of): > > The programs have to behave _identical_ independend of > > the python version. > > This reveals a hopelessly naive view on standardization. > Actually, it's much, much worse than naive, it's fossilizing: no program can continue evolving. It reminds me of Microsoft's DirectX thing, all recent versions contain all previous versions, in order to replicate past version's behaviour, downright to that caused by bugs or implementations errors. > > > There is of course a thorough standard test suite for Python > > Hmm. It should be somehow possible to get python (and perl) > > into the LSB, hmm. > > > > > Other than that, I expect that including Python in LSB is more a > > > matter of political will in the LSB committee than anything else. > > I'm not that sure, at least for LSB 2.0 which is supposed to be > > modulized this might actually happen. (Though probably only if also > > Perl gets > > included.) > > Why would Python only be included if Perl was also included? > As I said, this is just politics. > Tobias: What if certain [Python] program contains code that depends on behaviour caused by a bug, or an "interim" feature? Should Python become fossilized? :-( -gca pd: Please excuse and ignore following legalese :-( -- Advertencia:La informacion contenida en este mensaje es confidencial y restringida, por lo tanto esta destinada unicamente para el uso de la persona arriba indicada, se le notifica que esta prohibida la difusion de este mensaje. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, o si hay problemas en la transmision, favor de comunicarse con el remitente. Gracias.

1 0